Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 272 days, attributing it to not verifying emails due to various personal and family medical reasons, leading to an ex-parte order by the CIT(A). The Revenue argued for dismissal due to lack of sufficient cause for the delay.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, citing the Supreme Court's liberal approach in cases with sufficient cause. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and did not decide all grounds on merits, hence remanding the matter.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable and whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee is valid.
Sections Cited
143(3), 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
1. The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 20/03/2024 for the Assessment Year 2018-19.
There is a delay of 272 days in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee filed an application coupled with an affidavit of the Director contending that the Assessee has not verified the e-mail as the said e- mail id was sparingly used by the Assessee. Further submitted that the said e-mail was used by one of the Directors who had resigned on 22/05/2018 due to medical problem of her children. Further stated that due to various medical conditions of the family members, the notice sent by the Ld. CIT(A) has not been verified which resulted in passing of the ex-parte order by the Ld. CIT(A). Thus, sought for condoning the delay in filing the present Appeal.
Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that, there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay, thus sought for dismissal of the present Appeal on delay in latches.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal.
The Assessee in the Affidavit for condonation of delay contended that the Assessee has not verified the e-mail as the said e-mail id was sparingly used by the Assessee. Further stated that the said e-mail was used by one of the Directors who had resigned on 22/05/2018 due to medical problem of her children. Further stated that due to various medical conditions of the family members, the notice sent by the Ld. CIT(A) has not been verified by the Assessee, therefore, the Assessee could not file the Appeal on time before the Tribunal.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 272 days in filing the present Appeal.
Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 19/04/2021 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 19/04/2021, the Assessee preferred the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 20/03/2024, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee.
The Ld. Department's Representative relying on the order of Lower authorities sought for dismissal of the appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) , the Appeal has been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It is further observed that while deciding the Appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee on its merits.
Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.
In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.